Howard Dean: 'My Generation Needs to Get the Hell Out of Politics'

[DonViejo]

by Lawrence Bonk | 9:36 am, December 28th, 2017

Howard Dean, former DNC chair and guy whose presidential campaign was ruined because he got excited once, was on Morning Joe today, to talk President Donald Trump and the future of progressive politics, particularly in the 2018 midterm elections. He talked of the coming “blue wave,” as expected, but also made an interesting point about the shifting demographics of the Democratic party.

“I actually think the progressives are in the process of informally taking over the Democratic party,” he said. “I think the country has moved to the left. It’s shocking to me, but a majority of Americans think Medicare for all is a good idea.”

Dean gave Sen. Bernie Sanders much of the credit for boosting the idea of universal healthcare, but stopped short of saying he should be the party’s nominee 2020. Why? He’s too old, as is Dean himself.

“I’m very much for someone who is younger. I think my generation needs to get the hell out of politics,” he said. “Start coaching and start moving up this next generation who are more, I think, fiscally sane. Neither Republicans or Democrats can claim they are fiscally responsible anymore.”

The former Vermont governor continued to pile on his fellow boomers, saying “This young generation is going to pay for that if we don’t get the hell out of the way and have somebody who is 50 running the country.”

Guest host Willie Geist suggested that would rule out Joe Biden, who is 75, and Dean consented, noting that he would “be supporting someone who is younger, in the next generation.”

So who is on Dean’s list of “terrific” potential 2020 candidates? He named Sen. Chris Murphy, Sen. Kamala Harris and, even, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, among others, citing that he “would not be surprised if there are 17 people running.” Yikes.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/howard-dean-my-generation-needs-to-get-the-hell-out-of-politics/

[NCTraveler]

1. The irony is thick.

I say that as a Dean supporter.

[shraby]

2. I agree with him totally. Time for the old ones to step aside, they've had their

chance at the wheel and we still have people without health care, and a crumbling infrastructure, money moving on the up elevator, homeless people, ad infinitum.

Maybe younger ones should be given their driving permits and go for it.

[janterry]

3. I agree

Though as someone who is not quite a boomer (I'm on the cusp), I feel like our effort and failures have really laid the groundwork for what needs to happen next.

We couldn't be at a place where medicare for all is accepted without what has transpired (credit where credit is due!)

But it's time for new energy and new ideas. Bring them on!

[loyalsister]

46. "our effort and failures have really laid the groundwork"

Perfectly stated!! The problem with having the old guard on the ticket over and over again is that their mistakes are always on full display. And, we have not been hearing fresh solutions that we need to drastically change policies that have been failing since the 70s.

Trickle down economics has been criticized but never abandoned. Putting it on steroids will be a disaster, but Democrats have helped maintain it. They have had good intentions and have tried to tweek it a bit, but haven't been able to break it. Dean is spot on in pointing out that people who are going to be around and currently have kids growing up to advocate for a better future.

[Blue_true]

13. They should focus on coaching young people,

to help young people avoid preventable mistakes. I say this as a baby boomer from just after the midpoint of that generation. I would never run for office, but I would work my tail off to elect level headed 20, 30, 40 somethings that are progressives.

[Hortensis]

35. From "they:" drop dead yourself, Shraby.

I say that respectfully of course, just as you do as you respectfully believe my generation should "step aside" for those far less involved and far less experienced. No bigotry based on age on your part, and no bigotry against those who display profoundly bigoted ageist notions themselves, at all.

Hey, younger generations: If you're so young, clueless and irresponsible that you have no idea who and WHAT your representatives are and didn't bother to vote in 2016, you're qualified: Run for Congress! America need YOU!

[shraby]

36. I'm 75 years of age and I think it's time the younger generation

stepped up to the plate.
The age requirement for a president is plenty old enough to be aware of what the job requires. In fact much better than someone on the edge of possibly having alzheimers or dementia.

[crazycatlady]

54. First Democratic federal candidate in 2018 is 33

PA-18 special election. His name is Conor Lamb.

ETA special election in mid March

[TheFrenchRazor]

53. step aside? how bout this? let young people work for it and earn it, like everybody else. nt

[Egnever]

55. Yup many of the folks in the Senate have been there for decades

They are the ones that drove us there.

[Hortensis]

64. Through the DEMOCRATS WE ELECTED, we gave America what

the Republicans are working so hard to destroy now.

You're spitting foolishly indiscriminately, Egnever. Including all over yourself -- if you consider yourself a Democrat, of course.

Maybe pick even one old Democratic senator you want to toss out and read about that person's record?

Here's one everyone really SHOULD know about: Chuck Schumer.
42 years in elected office -- certified ferociously experienced old fart.
Consistently strongly liberal through that entire period, most of which took place in battle to hold against the prevailing national wave of increased conservatism among the electorate.

Right now a bunch of senators are now fighting to claim "most progressive" for 2020, but Schumer's 42-year career says a whole lot more than just a couple years of chasing the current zeitgeist.

Maybe start with a couple current analyses and then go look for more about him, the person.

http://politicsthatwork.com/voting-record/Charles-Schumer-300087

Summary of voting record: Senator Schumer opposes big business, taxing the middle class, military spending, domestic surveillance and

supports taxing businesses, restrict money in politics, consumer protection, disaster relief, funding education, environmental protection, gun control, public health, foreign and humanitarian aid, humane immigration policy, labor rights and wages, lgbt rights, avoiding default, poverty amelioration, racial equality, increasing revenues, taxing the wealthy, a robust safety net, higher spending, women's rights.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/charles_schumer/300087
Some good graphs and summaries here -- keeping in mind that, like others, they are based on limited metrics that don't begin to tell the whole story.

http://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?house=senate
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Charles_Schumer.htm

538.com Tracking Schumer In The Age Of Trump
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/charles-e-schumer/

[Kilgore]

4. Totally agree with him

And I say that as a 60 something which would make me a youngster in dem leadership circles.

[Blue_Adept]

5. Time for GenX to move into play here

[Va Lefty]

6. I think he's right.

We need new faces and new blood.

[StevieM]

7. I think we may have 20 candidates running. And they will be from all age groups.

Whoever wants to run should run.

[TreasonousBastard]

8. I'm 70 and on three Democratic committees. I have seen batons passed to the young'uns, and...

they are winning local elections. Some of them even have new ideas. Some even have good ideas. But, the local party is getting younger, and that is a good thing.

Now, politics is still politics and power is fluid, deals are made, promises not kept, and it's a certain type of individual who thrives in this atmosphere, so we are not always getting that perfect match of a person who can win and actually do a decent job. That won't change.

My limited future is set. Unless I win the Powerball, I know exactly what will happen with me and what I am capable of. The future is owned by younger generations and they have both the right and the obligation to control it.

[Golden Raisin]

9. I totally and wholeheartedly agree. Time for new, younger blood.

(I am closing in fast on 70.)

[Bleacher Creature]

10. I was thinking he was going to make a very different point.

I don't think age itself is a problem. You'd never look at Biden, Sanders, Clinton, etc. and think that they're slowing down. My real problem is with the Baby Boomer generation itself. I'm not sure why, but it seems as though it has become an electoral juggernaut for greed, racism, and isolation in our politics. There are obviously exceptions, but the baby boomers seem to be what's holding us back as a nation.

[Blue_true]

14. I look at the sixties generation and wonder about what they really accomplished.

I am of the seventies. Yes, we got the EPA, cultural freedom as a result of late sixties and early seventies, but the people that came to adulthood in the sixties are providing the vote margins for republicans by a big margin, they are a big part of our modern problems.

[Bleacher Creature]

24. I think you're exactly right.

I'm sure there are many reasons, but I can't help but think that a big part of it is the fact that people who grew up during the 50s and 60s were kids when schools were being desegregated. They were also young adults when many of our cities were struggling in the 70s.

[alarimer]

65. In my opinion, the REAL problem is Fox News

We completely underestimate how much that has poisoned the discourse. For some reason, the elderly are particularly susceptible. But there is hope for the "young olds" (people like my parents- in their 70s who never watch Fox).

[Ferrets are Cool]

27. ....

"My real problem is with the Baby Boomer generation itself. I'm not sure why, but it seems as though it has become an electoral juggernaut for greed, racism, and isolation in our politics."

As a baby boomer who was in my "prime" during the late 70s & 80s, it is my belief that Raygun is to blame for the "juggernaut for greed, racism, and isolation in our politics." It was during his administration that "greed is good" became common language and at a campaign rally in 1976, Ronald Reagan introduced the welfare queen into the public conversation about poverty.
As the "grandfather figure" that so many Americans were seemingly looking for at the time, his message stuck and is still embedded in the minds of many of my generation.
The "white superiority" mindset has only gotten worse since that time.

Sorry about the rambling. I do that on occasion.

[LisaM]

29. I'm tired of the generational finger-pointing anyway.

The boomers are consistently blamed for things that Reagan did, which is ridiculous.

I think people still misjudge the forces that collided in about 1979 to get us to where we are now, and those are of the forces of an untrammeled free market using right-wing religion as a tool to force wedge issues and get votes to enact their agenda (and this is worldwide, not just in the US). That agenda created the enormous income inequality we have now, and the corporate interests rode the back of fundamental religious leaders to gain their political ascendancy.

That's put us in a struggle to move forward on cultural issues, which has sucked up a lot of time and energy. Overall, I think the gains are positive, and maybe one day, our generations will be remembered for moving the dial on things like interracial and gay marriage, for affording rights to the disabled, and for improving the atmosphere in the workplace so that sexual harassment is no longer permitted (at least under law).

I wish people could stop being on the defensive and see shared values. Older politicians should be mentors. I think there's almost a generation gap, we don't seem to have a ton of seasoned pros in their 40s and 50s, and maybe that's because of local term limits, or people running for office who are not career politicians but are from industry? I don't know.

[loyalsister]

47. Yes!

Having grown up in the 80s, I remember it as a time of absurd materialism and greed. I remember that my peers in college just wanted to go into a profession where they could make a lot of money. Paul Ryan represents us, unfortunately. I knew people who were reading Ayn Rand then.
Obviously, there are plenty of gen xers who did not fall into that. Aside from needing fresh ideas, we need to make sure that it is not only the nefarious power hungry gen xers are running for office.
From what I have seen in engagement and committment to progressive ideals, I have a lot of hope for millennials.

[Ferrets are Cool]

49. And dont get me wrong...

there is nothing wrong with wanting to make a lot of money. Just dont fark over others in order to do it. I've always tried to work hard and make something of myself. I've learned thru the years that working hard isnt enough in American anymore. For many, it never was.

[loyalsister]

50. I agree

I have no problem with individuals wanting to make money. But my concern is that pursuit of wealth became a sort of narcissistic demand. Carter was the last president to support a universal basic income. It's interpreted as communism. But, when we have people living on the street and starving and dying from lack of healthcare, we have clearly not gotten everything right.
Thanks for the oh so true statement on the "American dream." Policy makers need to stop lying about it.

[Ferrets are Cool]

58. And thank you for

your mention of President Carter. I OFTEN think of how things would have been different if the elections with Carter and Gore had not been stolen. I DO honestly believe the U.S. and the world would be a better place. A MUCH BETTER PLACE.

[NewJeffCT]

11. Howard Dean didn't lose in 2004 because he got excited on TV

he had already lost the Iowa caucus after having been the frontrunner for months. The "Dean Scream" moment hyped by the media maybe put the nail in his coffin, but he was already in the coffin when it happened.

That said, I agree that the older generation of politicians - Sanders, Clinton, Biden, Warren, etc - should step aside and let somebody (or somebodies) young and charismatic take the party mantle.

[The River]

12. The Very Definition of "Ageism"

: prejudice or discrimination against a particular age-group and especially the elderly.

Via Google: ageism site:democraticunderground.com
About 670 results

I guess DU is against it except when it isn't.

[Blue_true]

15. My problem with old people is that most have compromise values for expediency.

Feeding and sheltering the poor comes with some disappointments and other setbacks, but if one take the viewpoint that five people saved is progress, then you keep working to save more. Old people in the 60 and above range view social change as something that need to be easy and come with a dollar amount attached to it, they ignore the many benefits of social change that I think younger people see. It is not ageism to say that many people from a generation don't get it, the voting behavior proves the point, they are the fuel that keep republicans alive.

[Ms. Toad]

30. Pardon me while I pick my old and decrepit jaw off of the floor.

You actually need to sit down and talk with some of us "old" people.

I see a lot more younger people who have compromised values for expediency - at least as you seem to be defining expediency in your text. It is largely the younger generations I see demanding no compromise on values (i.e. 5 saved isn't good enough - we have to save them all), and the older generations who are more realistic and urging compromise where compromise will save 5 people (as opposed to demanding that we make the Republicans own this tax bill by refusing to support bills that will minimize the consequences on programs that impact people's lives (like the pay-go cuts that are likely to hit Medicare, for example).

I can't tell you how many conversations I've had with my 20-something daughter (and her peers), in which they insist that everyone should just be paid a living wage, or have access to healthcare, and who have absolutely no clue how long my generation has been working on it to get wholly inadequate ACA - which, even though wholly inadequate is the most progress that has been made in generations. Had we rejected it (as many of the younger purists did because making saving 5 wasn't good enough, we needed to save everyone), there are millions of people who would not now have access to any health care until it was too late. (Granted, there are many more who still need access - but millions have been saved by compromising values - not for expediency - but for the goal of doing the best we can now to save as many as we can, acknowledging that social progress comes with disappointment and setbacks because we aren't going to get the perfect bill, and saving some now is better than saving none while demanding the perfect.)

As for 60 being old - I dare you to keep up with my schedule. I am currently working 80-100 hours a week, implementing newer technology in my teaching methodology to suit the needs of the current generation of students (whose use of technology is vastly different than my generation (none) or even the generation I first started teaching nearly 4 decades ago. I don't plan to retire for another decade.

Finally, I agree with the OP. We need to start grooming the younger generation, largely because there will be a vacuum of leadership if the younger generations of progressives are not moving into positions of power and influence, because the older generations don't want to let go (and because there continues to be a personality cult around certain persons and families). If that happens on our side, state-wide and national positions will be filled with the likes of Trump. That's not ageist. That's just the reality that no one lives forever, and it takes time to learn political leadership. We're cutting off our noses to spite our face if we continue to elect only older people and don't apprentice and support younger progressives into the roles, there will be a gap when there is none.

Your comment, on the other hand, was extremely ageist. It categorized entire generations as having a single perspective, and suggested tossing them over becuase of it. In case you can't tell, pisses me off - and I have engaged in some ageist categorizing partly to make my point.

[Blue_true]

33. You don't seem to be the type of old person that I was referring to.

The fact is republicans get their voting margin from the 60 and above age group. To many of those people it is about them and those close to them, and not about society as a whole. You are one of the exceptions, bless you. You are right, some young people demand the whole loaf or nothing, that is why mentoring from older people is so critical - let the young people fight the battles while teaching them that sometimes blasting all the cannons is not the wisest choice.

I don't plan to ever retire, but I also realize that a time comes when I should move from the point and let younger people take the point while I mentor them in the hope that they avoid the mistakes that I have made - if I do that right, I see fresh perspective and ENERGY come into efforts that are important to me.

In no way am I an ageist, I strongly believe that corporations and businesses make a grave mistake when they fire older workers or won't hire them - not just a moral mistake, but a serious business efficiency and effectiveness mistake.

I get the sense from your post that you are in the academic world. I am in the business world as an engineer. One of the great things about academia is that older people can contribute until they are ready to do something else, in the business world that typically only happens for people that wholly own the business.

I want to see the older politicians in our party use their vast experience and wisdom to mentor and help shape the people that will be leading 15 years from now, that is what I got out of what Howard Dean said.

Sorry if I pissed you off, but I also have very strong viewpoints in this area.

[Ms. Toad]

41. Keep your prejudices, don't get shook,

If you find something different when you take a look.
Just close your mind and play it cool.
It's the exceptions that prove the rule.

You probably won't get the reference, since it is a Vietmsn era poem. But responding as you did, by declaring that I'm an exception is the same way racists respond when they encounter the "good" black - treating that person as an exception, rather than examining their own prejudices.

[Blue_true]

42. I am not getting through. No use to keep trying. nt

[Ms. Toad]

48. You're not getting through, becuase you insist you are not ageist

when your original post is quite possibly the most ageist post I have seen on DU.

Exceptions don't prove the rule - they expose the fallacy of stereotypes based on age, gender, race, etc.

[Igel]

16. It's all subordinated.

Sanders wasn't too old. McCain was.

Even though Sanders would have been older at inauguration than McCain would have been after his first term.

First, figure out what you want. Declare that to be objectively correct. Then all the decisions as to lesser values fall in line. If you don't know your conclusion, how can you even begin to look for the unbiased facts to put together a valid argument? And then say this is "objective". It's the Soviet use of the term, but at least it's an established use.

[GeorgeGist]

18. Retirement is a wonderful thing.

[spooky3]

26. I agree. Treat people as individuals.

[LWolf]

17. Well,

Dean can get out of politics, and don't let the door hit him on his ass on the way out.

disclaimer: I was a Kucinich supporter back when Dean was relevant. I didn't NOT like him; just preferred others, and Dean's trajectory since '04 has justified that preference for me.

The irony is strong here; Dean says the older generation needs to "get out," while the Democratic Party establishment was busy denigrating millennials and blaming them for losses a year ago.

As someone born in 1960, I'm happy to see those in my generation who have bowed down to establishment politics bow out. That's not all of us.

I also appreciate and welcome the energy and involvement of young people outside the establishment, building change from the ground up. They are the Democratic Party's best chance for staying relevant.

I'm happy to send young progressives ahead to blaze new trails; I'm happy to have their backs. That doesn't mean that an entire generation needs to go away, though.

[maxsolomon]

21. I don't know what denigration of Millenials you're talking about. The ones that didn't vote?

I know one of them - my stepson. "Too busy". We have mail-in ballots. I gave him a stamp.

Dean is referring to the focus on Septuagenarians as Presidential candidates (HRC, Sanders, Biden).

The smart move would be to run someone younger against Trump, who'll be 74 in 2020. Someone that can make him look like the pompous, creepy lecher he is. Someone that can expose his degenerated faculties. Someone that will laugh at his bullying. Someone that can make his insults boomerang back on him.

Kamala Harris.

[awesomerwb1]

28. Kamala looks like a great candidate....for a different time

but I doubt she has the experience to overcome all the shit reps will use against it, unfairly. The dark side does not like women, much less minority women.

Until we can get the younger generations 18-54 to consistently participate in politics and VOTE, a female with less qualifications than Hillary can't win imo.

Before you bash me, I would love for women to have BIG majorities in states, Congress and the Senate. Would LOVE it.
But we also have to be realistic and just WIN now before reps control everything.

[maxsolomon]

32. well, we'll see. it's a long long time from now.

no woman has the quals that HRC did. Obama had what Harris has.

President Fartbag had less.

[LWolf]

61. I have voted for

women for president 3 times in my lifetime, and one was a black woman. I do not regret any of those votes; if some of us aren't courageous enough to cast them, we'll never move forward. If the Democratic Party is determined to stick to identity politics, a black woman is a great choice.

Personally, I'd prefer Nina Turner to Kamala Harris. That way I get the issues as well as the personality and the identities.

[LWolf]

60. A simple search of DU

in the last year would answer your question, if you really wanted an answer. I doubt that, since you provided your own evidence for my point. BTW...anecdotal evidence offered as a broad brush is simply not valid.

[maxsolomon]

66. yeah, i have a life. not going to do "simple searches" when i'm not sure what your point was.

.

[LWolf]

67. Okay.

Let me repeat your own words to you:

"I don't know what denigration of Millenials you're talking about."

My point, again: Millenials were repeatedly blamed for Clinton's loss, and characterized as lazy, right here at DU; you simply added to that body of defensive blaming with your post. And, of course, "I'm not going to do a search" to inform yourself when you are "not sure" is a stereotypical avoidance tactic. But, of course, carry on.

[delisen]

19. We have lots of examples of presidents in their

50s and 40s. Have they done exceptional jobs? Are there things they missed? Did they sometimes cede too much power to anti-democrats forces ?

I think the younger presidents often might have achieved more for the people if they had been older at the time they served.

Were younger people any better at recognizing the Russian threat, or at defending against propaganda, and non-violent attacks on democracy by another country.

I think we need to get used to people having longer political careers. It is the result of successful policies we have put in place-such as medicare, public health, anti-discrimination. Up to now people in general have had longer life spans and are healthier at older ages.

What we need is to begin the task of creating more power centers and figure out how they must be coordinated. If we don't make this change we are going to become increasingly authoritarian and conformist society. Power must be closer to the people.

I think we should be on watch for creeping authoritarianism that has arisen-it is going to have some effect on democrats too. This new concern about the age of candidates seems authoritarian. If we have primaries only by election- one person, one vote-why why try to artificially discourage individuals from running by creating out-groups. (Don't run if you are x, y, or z).

The country has partly shifted to the left on healthcare because the Democrats passed the ACA in 2009.

We have a representative democracy and it has many problems. some are systemic. One of these is that our population has massively increased but we have the same number of representatives we had when population was small.

We only still have 100 senators and due to the population differences in states-citizens in large population states are underrepresented.

Our political attention is divided-federal, state, local. Democracy requires an engagement that is time-consuming.

We don't seem to have enough room at the top to accomodate everyone's ambitions.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

20. YEP.

[delisen]

22. Don't care what age as long as doesn't play golf.

I don't care if a a president is under 40 or over 80-as long as she/he doesn't play golf.

The waste of golf courses and the elitist message it sends....how about fast walking like Harry Truman did with reporters, or bird watching-at least the president would be attuned to climate change in a fundamental way.

Starting 2020, no more golf.

Imagine if FDR was riding around in a golf cart during the height of the depression?

With the new massive trillions in republican debt, we need to end the golf imagery.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

38. Most modern presidents played some golf

DDE, JFK, LBJ, WJC, BHO, others, going back to Taft.

Not all played as much as Trump, but others managed to do their job and play some golf.

There are better litmus tests than golf/no-golf.

[delisen]

59. Golf-environmental disaster, gender inequality, income

inequality. When Democratic president or high public officials are pictured happily playing golf it sends a message about our concern for the environment, distribution of resources,access to power, and equality of income.

Here I'll just address the environmental message golfing sends.

Going forward let our presidents promote the Democratic principle of working for the environment-not against it.

This piece in The Guardian some of the massive negatives of golf.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/jun/14/thecaseagainstgolf

But the serious case against golf is empirical, and undeniable. That is its environmental impact. The construction and maintenance of golf courses is harmful to fragile ecosystems the world over. Its proliferation as the international pastime of the leisure class is multiplying the problem, and its approval by governments and societies epitomises the wasteful and scurrilous approach to development that is replicated in miniature on millions of suburban lawns.

According to a United Nations Environment Programme report on the impact of tourism:

"Golf course maintenance can also deplete fresh water resources. In recent years golf tourism has increased in popularity and the number of golf courses has grown rapidly. Golf courses require an enormous amount of water every day and, as with other causes of excessive extraction of water, this can result in water scarcity. If the water comes from wells, overpumping can cause saline intrusion into groundwater. Golf resorts are more and more often situated in or near protected areas or areas where resources are limited, exacerbating their impacts."

[Lifelong Protester]

23. Let the "younsters" do it.

And they will (I know, I'm 'old')

[SharonClark]

25. Totally agree.

I became politically active at 18. When I was in my early 20s, older people (probably in their 40s) would tell us, "oh, we tried that and it didn't work". Our response was "well, we'll give it a try and see what happens". I am all for younger people picking up the ball and running for the goalposts.

[4now]

31. I totally agree with Howard Dean

We have a great bench.

[handmade34]

34. really?

I like Howard Dean but disagree vehemently... ageism is not any better than other isms... agree that most baby boomers running the country are assholes but the solution is not to push all people over 55 aside

I want the best/most qualified person to become president/congressperson... I know some very qualified septuagenarians

[erinlough]

37. Totally agree with you.

It is our diversity that will help us take our country back. Young or old, black, brown or white and male or female, I’ll embrace any leader who is qualified and reflects democratic principles.

[treestar]

63. 55 is way too young to be the top age

People nowadays don't really start deteriorating until 80. At least, if they keep active mentally (unlike the Dotard).

[joshcryer]

39. The Republicans OWN younger generation seats. They completely dominate.

It's actually sad. Of all the young seats held by politicians, they are young, Republican, conservative types, whose daddies raised them with their pathetic boomer logic.

[Ilsa]

40. Not just for president, but for some of these Congressional seats.

We need more youthful leadership moving through leadership in Congress.

[kpete]

43. I agree

The Age Of Aquarius, my ass

I was SO hopeful in the 60's

"I think my generation needs to get the hell out of politics”

HE IS SO RIGHT!!!

kp

[tblue37]

44. Whene the GOP had 17 candidates, none could collect enough votes to

stop Trump. A long, vicious primary with too many candidates hurts the eventual nominee, provides sound bites for the opposition in the general election, and opens a path for a crank, faux-populist, but media-friendly candidate like Trump.

Two or three strong candidates would be good. We had Hillary, Bernie, and O'Malley. That was a strong slate for the primary. (Chaffee and Webb were inconsequential afterthoughts.)

[ucrdem]

45. Garcetti is a good mayor and a capable pol but for 2020 I'd go with an oldster.

Why? Because Trump is an amoral clown and will find a way to permanently damage whoever runs against him. So why waste a good future senator/governor/veep /president in such a futile contest? If Joe wants to do it then I'm all for letting him have a go. His chances are better than even but not guaranteed and the campaign will leave a lot of blood on the tracks. It might be disastrous but then it might not.

AND -- he has eight years of Obama to point to and in two years that's going to look like paradise lost.

[shanny]

51. Go knit.

[crazycatlady]

56. I"m in my 30s and knit

I knit the Resistance.

[shanny]

57. sounds good

[edbermac]

52. Never trust anybody under 30.

[treestar]

62. Whoever can win

should run, regardless of a superficial number.

[sarcasmo]

68. Kick.